1.Broadbridge (2003) examined the difference between male and female speakers consisting of two males and two females who worked for the same English-language school in Tokyo. The study results showed that men were the ones to interrupt most, and women were interrupted most. Similarly, Zimmerman’s and West’s (1975) study of mixed-sex conversations shows that men constantly infringe women’s right to finish a turn and roughly grab the floor.
However, women are concerned not to violate the man’s turn but to wait until he has finished speaking. In contrast, James, and Clarke (1993), in their studies of interruption, found no significant differences between genders in this respect and that both men and women interrupt other men and women. However, according to James and Clarke (1993, p.268), ‘A small amount of evidence exists that females may use interruptions of the cooperative and rapport-building type to a greater extent than do males, at least in some circumstances (James, and Clarke in Wardhaugh, 2006, p. 325).
2.The turn-taking style of interaction is when the participant listens while the other participant or participants speak. As the conversation progresses, the speaker and listener’s roles constantly switch to accommodate everyone involved to speak and listen. According to Sacks, H., Schegloff, G. (1974), in turn-taking, the current speaker A selects the next speaker B, then B can speak and satisfy the turn. 2. If A selects another speaker, C instead of B, then C begins to speak. 3. There is also the possibility of a third situation that A current speaker does not give a chance to another speaker to speak and hold the floor of conversation. The turn-taking model posited by Sacks et al. (1974, in Coates, 2004) Zimmerman & West (1975, in Coates, 2004) identified problems as Overlaps and Interruptions.
While overlaps occur when a speaker over-anticipates, interruption is a clear violation of the turn-taking model. According to Zimmerman and West (1975), men tend to interrupt and violate turn-taking rules more than women in mixed-sex conversations to denote their power. Meanwhile, women perform fewer violations and tend to wait until the speaker has finished talking. Since men interrupt women to show their strength, it is likely for them to grab the floor from women and initiate more disruptive interruption than a cooperative one (Zimmerman and West in Wardhaugh, 2006, p.325).
3.Tannen’s (1995) study on the difference between males’ and females’ speeches concludes that men are more sensitive to power dynamics. They tend to speak to keep them in a dominant position, whereas women are more concerned about the rapport dynamic and speaking in ways that save face for others. According to Zimmerman and West (1975), men tend to interrupt women in mixed-sex conversations to denote their power. Meanwhile, women perform fewer violations and tend to wait until the speaker has finished talking. Since men interrupt women to show their strength, it is likely for them to grab the floor from women and initiate more disruptive interruption than a cooperative one (Zimmerman and West in Wardhaugh, 2006, p.325).
4.Cooperative speech style entails using and building on both parties’ better ideas for the best. Characterized by support and solidarity, the collaborative style assumes that the participants are all working towards a common goal and are willing to help each other along the way. Tannen (1992) argues that women in their conversation use collaboration and cooperation to build relationships. As for men, they tend to use conversation for dominance purposes and to protect themselves from others. Besides, they view conversation as a contest to preserve independence and avoid failure (1992, p.24-25). Women’s speech is said to be softer and more polite. They typically create an environment with closeness and consensus. However, men often use aggressive commands and directives to get the upper hand in conversation to protect themselves from being pushed around
Formulate the documents with your own words. Do them separately and do not forget to write the researcher’s name and year in each.
